tv Washington This Week CSPAN October 7, 2013 2:00am-4:01am EDT
pressing task of the korean nation. entering the new century, meetings were held on two -- adjusting the declaration and thus providing thanks to the efforts of the dprk, the relations have improved. approaches ared coming against by south korean authorities that's creating us back into a destructive stage again. the joint declaration, the only way to achieve and to open the way is to promote dialogue between the north and the south hands, we by joining
will work hand-in-hand with anybody who wants unification and prosperity of the nation's. effortnification of the of the june 15 joint declaration. in conclusion, the dprk will continue to develop cooperative relations. managementer stable and is responsibility and role in ensuring world peace and prosperity are the guide for foreign policy. dependent on friendship. thank you. [applause] >> i thank the foreign minister
of democratic party of korea. what you can see more of the our videoions and library. >> c-span, we bring affairs for washington and rectal into you putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events and gavel-to-gavel coverage. all as a public service of private industry. industryy the cable tv 34 years ago and funded by your local cable or satellite provider. you can watch it in hd. >> both chambers of government are back in tomorrow. the house will have a general business. short term spending bills that
fund individual federal agencies and programs remain to be voted on by members. the senate returns at 2:00 p.m. eastern for general speeches. votes are scheduled for 5:30 p.m. lawmakers and in both chambers are still searching for ways to resolve their differences on how and when the federal government should be reopened. live coverage on c-span, the c- span -- the senate on c-span two. host: thanks to both of you for being with us. where is this all heading? guest: we cannot be sure. it reminds of the stories at the beginning of the civil war when both sides are absolutely certain it is going to be a very short and decisive battle.
people were actually writing down and it was a party atmosphere. what followed was grueling years of war. i think there has been a lot of misinterpretation on one side or the other. it does not look like anybody is feeling particularly vulnerable at the moment. on the other hand, we have heard intimation from speaker boehner that the deadline over the debt limit is one where he does not want to reach that end is not want to see a u.s. default. the house has passed legislation, making it impossible for the u.s. to default and i think we may see a little bit more attention to that from the house, reminding
the senate that if they can pass this, the first payment would be for service in fail of it to raise the debt limit. that would be impossible for the u.s. to default. it seems like a responsible position. it might put pressure on democrats did host: that deadline is next week. could this shutdown continue for the next 10 days? guest: it could, i am not happy about that at all. the war analogy is a good one. that is what has happened here. ted cruz launched this with this pseudo-filibuster without having much of a strategy in mind. the obama administration seems to have launched obamacare without much of the strategies, underestimating the backlash
against it. both of them are proceeding ahead. i look at speaker john boehner who is now the man in a middle -- a man in the middle. they're mostly democratic votes. he's pressured by his caucus not to anything without a minority of republican votes or his speakership would be in jeopardy. i was delighted when he said this is not want to go over the break of that default. -- of debt default. i know him to be a responsible leader, a man who came out of the business community and recognize the catastrophic nature of a debt default. this is just unthinkable, to take us into default.
some of the members of the house still haven't gotten that through their heads. i think he is going to do the right thing as far as the deadline goes. the question is what could this lead to? maybe some real reform as far as taxes and the general that. what is going to happen, nobody really knows. guest: one of the unusual things about the shutout as opposed to previous ones -- shutdown as opposed to previous ones, it has never been the case that the president has flatly refused to negotiate with the other party. he said there is nothing to discuss, i won't talk to you.
guest: anything that has obama's name attached to it is going to get a backlash from various republicans out there. guest: it seems to me the only way out of this is for both sides to lose something. both sides have to give on something. there has been talk to it has certainly been floating around washington that in exchange for the sequester caps on spending, which democrats would like, there might be some entitlement reform, which republicans would like. that kind of a deal might be possible if the president backs down from his current posture. at least the republicans are saying we are ready. they may have wandered into this posture. at least they are now saying they're willing to talk.
that meeting was a bizarre little kabuki theater. he invited people to the white house. there's nothing to negotiate and for an hour the president sat with leaders of congress and said there's nothing to negotiate. host: two different sides presented in this outlook section in "the washington post" this morning. republicans say it is now being implemented, it is a flawed law. why is this the centerpiece of the debate? guest: the law of the land only takes you so far. the bush cuts were him off the land. don't ask don't tell was a law of the land. the fact that something is law does not mean it is sacred paid
up through the democratic process we can repeal and change laws. it became this effort to defund it, unwisely in my judgment, it became an issue because some republicans made it so. i think the better strategy would have been to pick out certain aspects of the law as it is being rolled out. the individual mandate, the president has unilaterally granted a one-year waiver for the employer mandate. it only makes sense to ask for the individuals to be given the same reprieve for a year and that is the kind of reforms that republicans take to the people. andy i -- the notion that congress and members of the executive would be exempted from obamacare is highly unpopular with the grassroots.
if republicans made that their signature issue and said that is where they planting the flag, i think they would have had a lot more success and i think they would have had a lot more popular support. host: a look of region by region on opening week for the health exchanges, clearly a lot of issues with the website. people are still that people are still signing up guest:. -- signing up. guest: the white house believes once obamacare gets rolling -- i heard one of your caller's morning say that obamacare is going to give the government the right to warrantless searches of your home? i lost myself. it is kind of tragic in a way that people are so uninformed about it.
so many things happened when medicare got started. i am old enough to remember. the thing about the rollout is that there is so much confusion. i just read a poll that indicated more people respond favorably if you call it obamacare. few people know what it is and a large percentage of those out there -- the response will be more favorable. i agree with them. you are making a couple of points about what is fair or not. i think most democrats wanted a simple system, just expand medicare to cover everybody. we have a much lower number of people saying it was a
nonstarter even for obama. there were votes for a conservative plan created by the heritage foundation. obama adopted it for the nation and the mitt romney doesn't want to claim it. obama is convinced that republicans will want to claim it. once it's working. host: the senate and the senate democratic leader calling the house speaker "a coward." a piece from brad knickerbocker goes this way -- with no end in sight for the government shutdown, the partisan animosity has gotten unusually that are and personal even for washington. guest: i agree.
i think the president deserves some of the blame for this. i think talk radio deserves some of the blame for this. the town has become so bitter and vulgar. where you have members of the administration describing the other party as people with bombs strapped to their chests or terrorists or we will not negotiate with people holding a gun to our heads. remember in tucson, when the president give that beautiful speech about we need to raise the level of discourse? his administration is doing the exact opposite. and on the conservative side, there are talk radio hosts doing very similar kinds of things with extremely vitriolic rhetoric and i think the country is losing something very important. host: who do you blame on talk radio?
guest: michael savage, i've been misfortunate to tune into from time to time. he sounds hysterical. and not a pretty picture. there were others. one thing i will say -- he has been other places saying, well, the people on the right call obama a muslim or the people on the right sake obama -- the people on the right said obama is not born here. therefore anything that is said about anyone on the right is fair. these comments about calling republicans terrorist -- that's coming from the very top.
host: we want to take you back to what then speaker newt gingrich had to say to then president bill clinton. but first, speaker boehner had this to say. [video clip] >> i was at the white house the other night and listened to the president some 20 times explain he was not going to negotiate. listened to the majority leader of the united states senate say he was not going to talk until we surrendered. than this morning i get the wall street journal out and they say we do not care how long this lasts because we are winning. this is not some damn game! the american people do not want their government shutdown and neither do i. all we are asking for is to sit down and have a negotiation and bring fairness to the people under obamacare. it is as easy as that.
host: in the weekly standard fred barnes has this piece -- "boehner in charge, how the house speaker rallied his restive troops." republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. my take on this whole situation is the president has not signed a budget since he became president, and is continuing funding resolution allows shenanigans like this to take place. that is where i blame this government shutdown on. having said that, let me add this. as somebody whose insurance company has dropped him, i agree with senator ted cruz. in the letter they said it was because of the regulations and the affordable health care act. there were a lot of good things in the affordable health care
act. but there are horrible things democrats are incomplete denial about, will not address, will not admit. that is causing a lot of anger among the american people. guest: i don't and know what those horrible things are. it's very unfortunate. these things are not communicated. it would be better if the aca were communicated more widely and effectively early on. i think the question about the president signing a budget, we have had budgets every year. i have been dismayed that republicans have not been more specific in their budgets about dealing with entitlements, tax reform, the deficit. and national healthcare. both sides agree we have too many uncovered people in the country. but republicans did not really engage on a debate before the
mention of obamacare. and even republicans have complained about this. as a result, we have this haphazard way of governing where we put the program into operation and fix the bugs afterward. host: a comment thanking you for calling out savage talk radio. guest: can i address some of the problems we have seen with obamacare? the rise of employers making people part-time -- guest: [indiscernible] guest: it has increased. guest: that is one of the problems obamacare is trying to fix. guest: we were told thousands of times premiums would go down by $2500 per family. premiums are going up, right? many companies are forcing employees to drop spouses from
coverage. many companies are reluctant to hire because of the requirements of obamacare. we have seen the technical aspect of this law is not ready when the exchanges open up, there was mass chaos. we have many doctors saying they are going to retire early because of obamacare. the list is very long with the problems with this law. i think, actually, in contrast to the way some republicans see this, this is the greatest possibility for the democratic hardy -- the democratic party we've seen in 25 years. there is no way barack obama can say this is the republicans' fault or george bush's fault. if it turns out to be as unpopular as i suspect it will be, it will be a huge political liability for the democratic party.
host: this is mona charen. her recent column is available at town hall.com. guest: websites are preparing the ground for the next phase of this debate. they are saying, ok, there are problems with the implementation of obamacare, which is why we really need to move toward single-payer, which is what they wanted in the first place. my point is republicans have to be ready for that with their own truly market oriented consumer oriented reform. the way health insurance has been run in this country was never based on the consumer. it was always based on employers and insurance companies and third parties. it was terribly inefficient and terribly expensive. obamacare has doubled down on everything that was bad about our existing health care system. my view is republicans -- and some have introduced legislation
to do this -- should give the tax exemption not to employers, but to individuals and let individual shop for their own coverage. it would give businesses more freedom a lot more choice. insurers would be freed from the obligation to provide bronze, silver, gold, what the government says they have to provide. host: question about equal time. why is the gop fighting so hard to prevent millions of people from accessing private insurance? guest: that is not what the fight is about. the fight is the belief that this law will throw so much sand into the gears of the american economy -- and some republicans unwisely in my judgment thought they could prevent that by
staging a defund showdown and they thought they could cause the other party to fault. i think that was tactically a mistake. i don't think you can do that that way. reforms do happen. people say we have never changed and entitlement, but that's not true. we reformed welfare in the 1990's. that was one of the most successful pieces of legislation in my lifetime. catastrophic health insurance for the elderly. there have been other instances where laws do change, even entitlements. you have to have the right constellation of forces. it's helpful having one of your own party in the white house who is not going to veto the legislation -- although bill clinton did pass welfare reform. at that time the republicans controlled both houses. host: clarence page. guest: this goes back to world
war ii. employers offered insurance as an incentive. you mentioned medicare. medicare has changed as well. it has been changed to be improved. it was known all along it would be necessary with obamacare. and single-payer -- basically medicare is a single-payer program that preserves the private enterprise system. but somehow obamacare gets demonized as some intrusion of government into private lives. the bottom line is, as you mentioned, this is the debate now. what kind of health care system do we want? the public is now engaged. we believe the more that they
are exposed to it, the more they're going to like it. as ted cruz put it, they're using the sugar of the subsidies. the subsidies are something new. guest: i would agree with that unfortunate statement. only about two percent of people who apply for these are going to be eligible for subsidies and the subsidies are going to go to the insurance companies, not to the individual. guest: the flaws with the republican plan are held control, among other things. i imagine there will be a response from fox news. there you go again, giving money out to people who don't deserve it. guest: if everyone got a $5,000
tax adoption to buy health insurance, companies would be competing to provide plans for $5,000 and you would have genuine competition for the consumer dollar. guest: the cost controls though. this is the thing. this is what people do when the insurance bumps up against the government subsidy. host: this is our sunday roundtable with mona charen, a former aide to former first lady nancy reagan, a former editorial assistant with the national review magazine and a syndicated columnist. do i have that right? author of a number of books including "youthful idiots: how liberals got it wrong in the cold war and still blame america first." and clarence page, a pulitzer prize commentator and the author
of a number of books including "showing my colors: impolite essays on race and identity." guest: i have an upcoming book about the response to liberals. guest: you can interview me. [laughter] i have a show called "need to know." almost every week there is a new one. host: do you have a pop quest -- podcast? guest: i am getting used to living in the century. host: from cheryl silbert and mike mcintyre -- the headline is months in the planning -- a loose coalition of conservative activists led by the former attorney general edwin meese
gathered in the capital. their push to repeal mr. obama's health-care law was going nowhere. they desperately needed a new plan. of that session, held one morning in a location of the members is keeping secret, came a little notice from it -- blueprint to defunding obamacare." the story indicates this was long in the planning. guest: certainly the pressure of the deadline for opening up the exchanges put pressure on the other side. if we do not stop this now, the train is going to leave the station. i think that has a lot to do with the timing. guest: i agree with that. host: we could hear later this week, maybe this month the president's choices -- this is a discussion.
janet yellen is the major contender to replace ben bernanke. guest: that is the traditional choice. i think the big question is why there was such -- host: summers. guest: summers, thank you. why that balloon was floated. the president was very favorable to him. it was very controversial. he tends to set fires unintentionally just with his use of language. but yellen has so many fans out there now. i think obama would look bad if
he did not go with her now. host: she is the first female head chairman. guest: so much for the idea that the fed should be above politics. no longer. host: larry from kaiser, west virginia. mona charen. caller: yes, i would like to start from the beginning. when you vote on something without knowing what is in it, that is 100% wrong. secondly, the supreme court was making legislation. when they said it was a tax, they should send it back because taxes should originate in the congress, not the senate. i think all laws should apply to everyone or no one.
i went to work in 1958 for the first time and i went to the union to get benefits. and the unions, one of the main reasons unions used to get benefits to attract good people or get people to do jobs other people would not do. you would take a job maybe cleaning sewer pipes because they give you better health benefits. if everyone gets benefits from the government, there will be no reason to join a union or no one would ever want to do these jobs that no one wants to do. it is in the union's worst interest about the government give everybody health care. if you look at when i went to work in 1958, people went to unions to get benefits. there are people in unions then than there are today. host: thank you for your point. clarence page, your thoughts? guest: under company insurance
for 20 years now, and i have rarely seen coverage go down in recent years and costs go up. that is why there has been pressure to do something about getting more people covered in reducing the rising cost. you think about the price for our economy, etc. obamacare is the current scapegoat. fine. i have yet to see republicans come up with a new alternative. it's the rising cost that is the crux of the problem. host: and his point about unions? guest: sure, i'm always in favor of unions. health care is the least of their problems in this country. right now, yeah, unions have offered health care as a
feature. and there has been backlash against obamacare and some unions as a result of that. this is the kind of issue that gets worked out in negotiations. unions have a much bigger challenge facing them. host: what do you think about rush limbaugh and other right wing talk show hosts? guest: president obama said the rollout of obamacare was working. great. he said it was working fine. but he said everybody's costs were going to be reduced by $2500 a year. and what we have seen is the opposite. in many states, premiums are rising by that much. someone has to hold him to account for the fact that what he predicted is the absolute opposite of what is happening.
guest: the short term or the long term? host: he said when this law was passed. it has been passed and signed. the unions were there to point out this block. the unions are one of the democratic party's strongest supporters. they warned you are going to destroy the 40-hour week. i confess i have not listened to rush limbaugh in a very long time. i do not know what tone he has been taking lately. guest: i will blame liberal talk radio as well. host: msnbc. bill o'reilly was on the chris matthews show the other day. guest: i saw the show. again, there was the context,
joking on comedy central. host: the new book though. guest: they were talking about "killing lincoln," "killing kennedy," and "killing o'reilly" just got blurted out. guest: can you imagine what the result would have been -- guest: [indiscernible] guest: you're absolutely right about the civility declining, especially since the clinton- gingrich battles of the 1990's. and we did not have talked radio and twitter, etc., etc., megaphones like we've got now. it has only gotten worse. that can only go away by public shaming.
guest: i'm absolutely for that. and all these websites have anonymous comments. just put their names on it and i think that would be a big control to some of the vulgarity that has become part of our national discourse. host: we have a name on the tweet just sent to us. thank you for joining us. "if congress doesn't think we need a budget, do they think we need a congress? maybe we outsource budget to each state they left." host: myra, good morning. caller: hi, i was just listening to ms. charon, and she was saying the government is changed and she named a few things. to me, the biggest change was -- [indiscernible]
as a black woman, that hurts very deep. so, yes, civility, not only in the right wing media. i have seen it deteriorate because this black man is president. host: thank you for that comment. guest: i know that is out there, that perception. there is a perception that there is more weakness toward this president than others, he does not get the level of respect other presidents have received. i really don't think that is the case. i really don't. i was a supporter of president bush. i had my reservations. i remember he was routinely compared to hitler.
he was called stupid. he was a moron. the abuse that was heaped on george w. bush was quite beyond anything we have seen. i really think it is a matter of where you sit and where your sensitivities are. just so you know, from my point of view as someone who supported the previous president, there was a lot out there that was deeply offensive. guest: i think you're absolutely right, first of all. i have heard a lot of people complaining about the joker pictures of obama. i remember there was joker depictions of george w. bush. yes, this has always been in politics. we have the first african- american president.
i had almost forgotten joe wilson's july moment. that moment in congress -- you go back in history, another congressman from south carolina got up and beat with a cane a northern representative there -- i am blanking on the names. this was after the civil war. the divisions in our country now are severe. even when we talk about obamacare, we have over half the states spending medicaid out of protest with this white house. a lot of people out there who need health care are not getting it as a result of it. how things are perceived out
there in the countryside, it's very hard for me to argue against people who say this president isn't getting special abuse because he's african- american. i think that is certainly part of it. i agree with you it is not a primary motivator, but it is out there. host: kathleen parker, her piece in the washington post this morning. a monumental mistake, saying that playing politics with the greatest generation was ridiculous. guest: i'm a veteran. the memorials were closed off. the lincoln memorial, etc. people need to see this government shutdown. it is not a visual story. you can't show closed head start.
guest: why not? sure you could. guest: all the processing of stacks and stacks of applications. the clerks aren't there. as part of the story. but seeing lincoln or jefferson out there, that is a story. we need to end the shutdown. and not take a piecemeal approach. guest: it cost more to close off the open-air memorials then it would be to leave it alone. host: governing by blackmail. suppose president obama would hold hostage any military funding for gun control. guest: both sides have to give. there has to be negotiation for both sides to make concessions. the president has said he is not negotiating.
until that time comes when he begins horse trading, giving a taking, we are going to have a shutdown. guest: republicans have been holding the line, insisting on having another swipe at obamacare. the republicans are trying to put this on the democrats, as though democrats have an interest in the funding obamacare. the public polls, i think, is showing it. host: one of the viewers saying maybe you'd be a good idea to outsource congress to china or india. good morning, charles. caller: good morning, steve. two observations. for the people who argue this is a law that has already passed i would like to point out almost a century ago we passed a law for prohibition. it almost destroyed the country
before we had enough common sense to turn around and repeal. the same thing is going to happen with obamacare. the second observation is, as far as defaulting on our debt, i hope we do, because if nothing else, it will make foreign countries such as china aware that we can't pay our bills and maybe it might even force congress to live within a budget we can afford, for god's sake. everybody knows we are spending more money than we have. what are they going to break up and use some common sense? there is none in congress. host: ok, thank you, charles. you mentioned asia. the president was supposed to be at that conference. basically loans from asia account for half of the gross domestic product in terms of the economy. guest: right. the caller made good comments. the debt.
we are fighting with this discretionary spending in discussions about balancing budgets. we are ignoring the 52% of federal spending goes to entitlements. if we don't deal with that problem, we are not going to be solvent in the very near future. guest: entitlements are -- guest: medicare, medicaid, and social security. guest: thank you. the most popular programs -- guest: they may be popular, but they are bankrupting us. the fact of the matter is -- guest: the fact of the matter is, we need to talk about the money and the services as money is coming for. that is why we are spending this money. let's be honest.
china, they are the ones who are paying for our spending to a large degree. to the extent of people understand globalism and how it works, we are a global society. we tried putting up trade barriers. prices at walmart will go up, and people do not want that either. guest: we have the same debate every single year. and as soon as republicans say we need to get a handle on entitlements spending, democrats respond with demagoguery. that is why we are at an impasse. guest: where did that come from? a republican president. guest: i'm just saying. you can even talk about reform without being demagogue by democrats. those stairs are the best tactic for getting democrats elected. guest: do you -- republicans are
not about to cut medicare or social security. guest: they did before in the paul ryan budget. guest: yeah, but the paul ryan budget was the same cuts in the obama proposal. that is demagoguery. it's a third rail for both sides. we can't dispense with this government sending because the public wants it. host: joining us at the table, clarence page and mona charen. i thought it would be useful to go back to 1995. i want to share with you two moments. this is december 10, house speaker newt gingrich on the government shutdown back then. [video clip]
>> this is the president's two- page press conference before going off to play golf. this is a real bill, which extends the debt ceiling. this is a real bill, which keeps the united states government open. one of the major problems we have in america, we are present it who does not mind playing. he doesn't mind talking. he seems to hate working. we have been locked in rooms hour after hour, a reconciliation process, which is moving us to a balanced budget, which is doing the right thing for america. this is hard. this is not just teeing off and having a nice 19th hole with your friends. these are tough decisions that are going to change the lives of our children by balancing the budget, lowering taxes, lowering
interest rates, and creating a better america. and they are tough. they take real work and people with the courage to be real leaders. guest: ah, memories. the great thing when the rhetoric was cleared away, we got a balanced budget in the clinton years. and we got rid of that in the bush years with the tax cuts geared to the wealthy. guest: there we go again. cuts for the wealthy. no, actually, they were geared to everyone and when the democrats took over congress, they did nothing to repeal the bush tax cuts for the vast majority of americans. they liked those. the democrats did like those, because indeed bush did the taxes for everyone who pay taxes. that moniker, tax cuts for the rich, was always false. guest: i don't think so. guest: maybe so, but it's true. host: here is what bill clinton had to say.
[video clip] >> i vetoed the spending bill sent to me by congress last night because america can never accept under pressure what it would not accept in free and open debate. i strongly believe there budget plan is bad for america. i believe it will undermine opportunity, make it harder for families to do the work they have to do, weaken can our obligations to our parents and our children, and make our country more divided. so, i will continue to fight for the right kind of balance budget. remember, the republicans are following a very explicit strategy, announced last april by speaker gingrich. to use the threat of government shutdown to force america to accept their cuts in medicare and medicaid, to accept their cuts in education and technology and the environment. yesterday they certainly
legislation that said we will only keep the government going, and we will only let it pay for this if and only if we accept their cuts in medicare, their cuts in education, their cuts in the environment. host: mona charen. guest: president clinton did eventually cave and sign a balanced budget which he said many times could not be done. first he said it would take 12 years and six years and five years. he finally signed one. they thought this was evidence that the government in washington was getting a handle on this out-of-control spending. absolute spending continued to rise but as a percentage of gdp it was falling and that was good news for market and the economy boomed. it was a very, very successful negotiation. despite the fact that it looks like what is happening now, its
endpoint was very different. we are so far from having a balanced touch it now that, if you know, it is frightening. the smallest increase in interest rates could bankrupt me. host: what would you expect this week? guest: i don't make predictions, but if i'm right, everybody remember. i think it will be more the same but behind those doors, i think discussions are happening. new developments need to be done. obamacare we will see say president issued this week. host: mona charen? guest: i hope there is a bargain.
i hope there is horse trading, because i do not think the government shutdown is a good thing for either side. i do not think the issue of obamacare goes away in the sense that it is the biggest issue in american political life, and it will be for the perceivable future. as a tactical matter, it was not worth trying to defund it now. republicans do not have the votes. the republicans will and should continue to point out the flaws in reforms that are necessary, including a full repeal should a republican be elected in 2016. guest: they will definitely point out all the flaws as time goes on here. guest: you betcha. host: thank you both. guest: thank you, steve. >> a look at some of the cases for the u.s. supreme court as it begins its new term next week. the wall street journal and new
york times will join us. we'll talk more about the supreme court was prior clerks. they will talk about the role of the clerk as well as what to do expect to see in the new term. we'll get your reaction by phone, e-mail, and twitter. >> this is the school for the deaf. she was a teacher living in a dormitory here. he was in a boarding house on the property. the bedroom in her directory building. this window here is where grace would have looked out and saw calvin across the courtyard. she will put a candle in this window. roomt them know the parlor below was available. this is where calvin and grace
when the recording would meet up. havel sit and talk and time together. despite him being in his 30's and she in her 20 pots they had to abide by the rules of the school. they had to meet somewhere where they were supervised while they were on camera -- campus. >> an event from the center for american progress on the state of women in america. among those participating are just in gillibrand who outlined legislature she is working on. this is one hour and 10 minutes.
>> good morning, everybody. i, the counselor for the center for america progress. i should be able to get the name right. and the president for american progress. i am thrilled to welcome you eventoday for a fantastic . business leaders and advocates and senator gillibrand on an issue that we feel is vital to the economic success. the changing workforce and ourging role to make sure workplace reflects the modern economy. we'll hear from senator gillibrand and a few moments to discuss legislation. let me talk a little bit about the work and the work we are doing in this area. just last week, the center for american progress in partnership
, planned parenthood, and emily's list announced and campaignthe fair shot for women and families which was very much focused on changing american laws to reflect the modern economy. very much in line with what senator gillibrand will talk about. we undertook the work because we recognize that today's economy has changed more and more women are breadwinners. more and more women are mothers are working. areunited states laws really behind the rest of the world in addressing these basic facts. if we want an economy that works, parents, mothers, and fathers and the reality is these
laws are important for men and women and that is still the case that women are the primary caretakers at home. event excited about this and our ongoing effort to work with senator gillibrand at the she creates a movement on behalf of these issues. panel joined today by a of leading advocates and experts and business leaders. first and foremost, the founder and ceo of the majority. ceo of aco -- phenomenal or negation of this issue. he has been a tremendous leader on ensuring that the workforce rules are really responsive to men and women. deborah, chief
operating officer, a leading nonprofit organization with a mission to expand opportunities for women in a business. they have done tremendous work in the private sector. we are also be joined by the director of the national domestic workers alliance and codirector of caring across generations which has done fantastic work on addressing the needs of caretakers and has been a tremendous advocate for these women who have really been left behind at who are gaining a voice. finally, last but not the least will be joined by susan, the vice president of public policy at google. having worked with susan, she has been a tremendous advocate for women in the private sector and expanding women's voices.
we are thrilled to have her here. but first, let me introduce beenor gillibrand, who has really one of the greatest advocates in the senate these days for women's issues. , howeadership on issues women are treated in the military, her relentless advocacy has really placed that issue at the center of the national debate. it is issues due to me because these issues of the military comment hillary clinton was on the armed service committee and the issue of rape in the military was a profound issue then. with the advent of having so many women in the senate, we have 20 women leaders. not just women leaders, forceful advocates like gillibrand who